Change Your Image
plex
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Panther Squad (1984)
Sybil lite with half the calories.
The other user reviews are pretty accurate.
It's like if Andy Sidaris was 14 and got a budget to make a film. Just like Hallmark Xmas movies, this one could easily be re-worked and improved to make a modern Sidaris flick, it has many, if not all of the same 80s elements.
From start to finish, this is terribly written/acted and awfully staged. There are so many continuity mistakes it was hard to keep up with them, the key ones being the girl-count from scene-to-scene. Maybe one or two of them took a food or bathroom break, but they had to keep on filming, who knows?
All of the women on Sybil's "squad" apparently can kick any well-armed and trained terrorists butt, and still look like they just came out of a salon, and their outfits, what little fabric there was to them, remained intact an unblemished despite multiple high-action conflicts in various nature settings. Don't look for any nip-slips, or cheeks, they're not here, the costumes keep body-parts well constrained. And on that topic, I think this is the only Sybil Danning flick without ANY nudity at all.(Her in a leather halter top is as risqué as it gets) this was on Tubi, so I am fairly certain it wasn't censored, but there's no bad language, the violence is subdued, so I'm curious as to the R-Rating. Toss in some early 80's B-band demo tracks, and your trip to the pre-Sidaris side is complete. Seriously, don't waste your time with this one.
The Sex Perils of Paulette (1965)
Disappointing Wishman project
Whew, this is so bad on so many levels( and I LOVE Dorris Wishman when she clicks). Ok, lets start with the title, Paulette does not appear to have any "peril" with sex at all. Furthermore, the way the film is presented, Tracy is the lead protagonists, and Paulette is the bad influence. Tracy is the cliche'd naive girl moving to NYC for her career, and naive/chaste she stays. She pays Paulette 2-months rent before even looking at the apartment. Weird. Paulette hangs out in her undies all of the time and never locks her door, and says "come -in" when someone knocks: even weirder. Well, snow-white Tracy gets so upset that some man tried to kiss her at a party (at a different apartment) she wants to move out and demands her money back. Tracy never becomes a hooker. Tracy never has sex. She does have a brief G-rated relationship with Allen (surprisingly played by known/seasoned actor Tony Lo Bianco)
On the topic of nudity, this is one of Wishman's most restrained (this restraint has NOTHING to do with the release date, that only applies to full-frontal) a few seconds of nipples and butt cracks and thats it. The promo photos (and title) give the false impression this film is far more revealing/edgy than it actually is.
The entire film is narrated, for reasons I can only surmise is she didn't have the budget to have a boom operator and sound recordist on site, or possibly the other people had terrible speaking voices or accents. The narration does not, in any way, improve the movie.
The script is completely inane, flat, and moronic. The directing and editing is so all over the place I didn't know if she was trying to show people or show pieces of furniture, a tree, a pond, a wall hanging, an ashtray, a pack of cigarettes, etc...Only view if you wish to complete your Wishman catalog.
Massacre at Central High (1976)
Are you at the crossroads of your life?
OK, I freely admit the FIRST reason I watched this was hoping to get a glimpse of Kimberly Beck nude (I had a crush on her when I was 14) and on that point, I wasn't disappointed. That aside, this film is better acted and written than most teen-angst horror films. It asks the main question: How do you behave AFTER you have eliminated the bullies?
To answer that would spoil the film. I saw this on Fawesome, and it was evident this was a VHS transfer { FYI, currently there is a much better version of this film on youtube}, as the digital tracking noise was minimally present. Now, let's get to the fun parts. The opening AND closing musical theme is the nauseating ballad "You're at the Crossroads of Your Life" with the sappiest lyrics sung by some crooner they found at a Holiday Inn cover band. Then we get to the plausibility of it all, of which there is very little, mainly due to the lack of people around. You'd think by the settings we were in post apocalyptic L. A. because there's no one else on the roads, no one else at the beach.
You'd think after 3 kids get murdered there would be some cops, EMT, ambulances, teachers, parents, investigators around, NOPE: NO ONE!
Then the killing-spree really takes off, mostly at the school. Again, nobody around. School is still open, and the senior prom carries-on as if nothing happened. On the topic of the prom, half of the attendees were old folks, and they all seemed really happy slow-dancing to jazz. Aside from the aforementioned nude scenes with Beck, Cheryl Smith who has provided limited dialog and stunt-boobs in such classics as Caged Heat, The Swinging Cheerleaders, and Cinderella 77' has a full frontal scene AND Lani O'Grady, the eldest daughter from "Eight is Enough," is topless. Of course, no teenage B-flick would be complete without Robert Carradine who gets 3rd-from-the-top billing despite his minimal appearance. Definitely worth a watch.
{continuity oops: Cheryl Smith's character's blouse is completely buttoned after her attempted rape, then moments later when she emerges from the school with her female chum and rescuer, her blouse is completely unbuttoned, bared chest exposed. So I guess victims of attempted rape have an urge to be an exhibitionist after being violated! Who knew?}
Macumba sexual (1983)
Transexual power!
Ajita Wilson is back yet again in yet another Franco-file this time as Princess Obongo, the "Goddess of Unspeakable Lust", to use her dark powers and transgender-re-assigned fake asymmetrical breasts to ensnare a hapless woman, yet another favorite of Franco's; Lina Romay, so that she can imbue them with evil and conquer the world, and do so while being nude.
Thats about as much of the story as I can unearth from this Franco-creepy nugget-O-nonsense.
I'm not sure which version the other reviewers saw, but this one is somewhere between NC-17 and Single-X porn, certainly not R.
Once again we found ourselves in J. Franco's world where there are no other people around and apparently not many clothes either= wall-to-wall full-frontal, lots of sex scenes, many close-ups of genitalia, oral sex, and masturbation. In Franco's world its normal for a woman to be spread-eagle while she causally chatting it up with a strange man, but hey, that's the looniness I have come to expect from him.
Romay is either full frontal, in hot pants that reveals her butt cheeks, or wears a dress that her breasts keep falling out of.
Yet with all of this pointless nudity, for me, the thing that grabbed my attention was the musical underscore and sound design. Most of the music is an analog string machine synthesizer someone had filtered everything below 1Khz, so it sounded like bees buzzing. I guess it's the man who plays Roman's husband, who for some reason has a cave-echo effect on his voice when he's inside or outside on a balcony; I couldn't figure that one out at all.
So if you are into Franco, transexual nudity, and Romay in a terrible blonde wig, then this creep fare is for you.
Heroes (2006)
8 stars for 1st-2 season, 3 stars for the rest
Nice premise, modern-family oriented with just enough edge to keep it interesting. For prime-time network its an ambitious undertaking and very entertaining. For a while.....
Sure, the premise is pure fantasy and whimsical, but after a while,
it become commonplace so they had to stretch it beyond acceptance.
We get so many back stories and flashbacks, time-jumping with endless new characters thrown in, it gets muddy fast.
Everything that needed to be said should have ended by season-2, but you know the story, NBC enjoys its ad-revenues so they beat this one to death, heavily over-played and labored."Save the Cheerleader, Save the World" was great premise and it was all this series needed.
In season-3 things start to get darker and mean-spirited, the characters become more unlikable, and if I have to hear Claire's father say one more time" I was doing it to protect the family" I was going to throw a brick into my set. Everybody betrays each others trust, yet they constantly say: "trust me." In equal annoyance was the character Hiro. His wimpish-ways were cute for a little while, but they started to get on my nerves, and the music Wendy and Lisa (of Prince fame) composed/implemented was kind of cliche'd Japanese soundbites that played every time Hiro and Ando had a scene (until season 4). The writer(s) made Hiro's character one big Asian cliche. By the end of the 4th season I was just waiting to see who would be killed(written)-off to put me out my misery. Recap: 1st-2 seasons YES, seasons 3 &4- NO! The series gets yanked before the story resolves,so be warned, before you invest all of this time.
Alice ou la dernière fugue (1977)
Huh?
I'm not sure I have watched the same movies as the others, who give this film glowing reviews, pretty much across the board.
Most of us are aware of Sylvia Kristel's work: she's one of the few Euro-actors who have found relative success in the Hollywood mainstream. But to be fair, most of he notoriety and success comes from the soft-core Emmanuelle franchise which are staged in various parts of the world. Kristel is easy-on-the-eyes for most, looks fine in full frontal nudity, which to be honest, (and with no negating criticism) is largely what she is known for. And on that same level of honesty is a better actress than most who come from other countries ( in this case, the Netherlands) aside from England.
To say this film plods along at a snail's pace is an insult to snails. This isn't Kubrick/Kurosawa-esque deliberate slow-pacing, its simply SLOOOWW. There's vey little dialogue, especially from our lead protagonists, and on that note, there's very little story-line or plot.
Kristel does a lot walking around in the "spooky manor" she finds herself "pseudo" imprisoned, sometime it allows her to venture outside where she does some more walking around, and after about an hour into the film she somehow escapes the manor to drive around for a while. There's a lot of dramatic musical underscoring to make-up for a lack of basic drama in the film. Of course, Sylvia does appear full frontal one time in the film, with style hair and make-up. The rest of the time she magically has all of these nice stylish outfits to wear, but I'm still not clear to why she was wearing them and for whom. I still have not figured out the point of this sleepy film that nearly put me in a coma.....
Küss mich, Monster (1969)
100% Incoherent nonsense.
Like my title states: 100% Incoherent nonsense. I have seen the Spanish version, but I'm not sure it would have made any difference.
This is without a doubt the most poorly dubbed film I have ever seen, But not to be outdone in the stinkery' department is the editing and continuity mistakes which are constant to the point it because laughable and I have to question if it wasn't intentional. But sadly, it's just horrendous film making. I have seen many Franco films, and I get the idea he makes more money if he can shoot and edit the film in 3 days, because thats what many of them look like, including this one.
Lesbianism was an edgy topic in 1969, so I'm guessing thats why their romantic interaction was only implied, never shown. If you have seen Franco films they commonly have copious amounts of nudity, often completely irrelevant to the story line. Comparatively, this film is very conservative in that regard. I read other reviewers who made claims of nudity and sexy outfits which is misleading as is the R-rating: its strictly of the PG fare and very brief. There's no bad language and any violence is brief (whipping) and more implied than graphic. A token Go-Go scene that had nothing to do with the film replete with a man who sings but we don't hear his voice, then abruptly we are in a different live setting with a different band, with our two female leads playing jazz saxophone without breathing or moving their fingers. Costume changes that happen in seconds. My favorite scene was about a woman who is getting drowned while in a tub of water, her killer is discovered and get shot, so her hero comes over to the tub while she is STILL SUBMERGED and asks if she's alright. Strictly for Franco fans.
Sticky: A (Self) Love Story (2016)
Healthy view good for the whole family.
Aside from the misleading title which suggest more about sperm than self-gratification, its a healthy view good for the whole family, although I believe its wise to view WITH your children, instead of your child being left alone to be scared about it by some religious controlling pious nut in Sunday School.
It covers a lot of bases and does so logically and convincingly. I was disappointed, however, they did not address one group of people who are societal outcasts, those who are not desirable to others, because of the way they look . When it comes to attraction, men have it FAR worse than women: a woman that is generally deemed unattractive can still get sex a lot easier than an unattractive man. Since it's been proven that humans need basic physical contact with one another, they mostly have to resort to self-gratification if they don't.
BTW, I did not see Ali, in this documentary.
Space Boobs in Space (2017)
McDonalds had less customers that day.
Its obvious the producers of this (whatever "this" is) wanted to lure-in unsuspecting viewers to make fun of them(the actual director gives the finger to the viewer at the end) by wasting their time, and do so, at least in part, with misrepresentation. The title has nothing to do with the content.(if you were under the impression a low-budget video with a buxom blonde on the cover, titled: "Space BOOBS in Space", with an MA rating, would have at least ONE partially exposed boob, you'd be wrong) This video could almost have a G-rating. What we do experience, and in the most excruciating ways imaginable, is a series of short stories, skits, and interviews, all of which could have been presented better by Helen Keller with an I-phone. My McDonalds reference denotes the bovine unattractive nature of the cast and my assumption that wannabe directors no longer scout the cliche'd bus-stops for wannabe movie stars. I felt embarrassed for them. Some will watch Ed Wood films to see how bad they are, but seriously, stay away from this one, I find no redeeming qualities about it, at all.
Poor Things (2023)
Steampunk+ Wes Anderson+ Kubrick
This artsy tour-de-force will be scrutinized for decades. Happily, this film is not for everyone, and does not fester in the pratfalls of populism. It's gloriously beautiful to look at, sometimes jaw-dropping. All of the production attributes are here and they are superbly executed; everything from set-design, art-direction, cinematography, costuming, make-up, editing, and an inspiringly fresh music score. Emma Stone undoubtedly gives an Oscar-worthy performance, if for no other reason (and there are several) there is nothing else I could compare this to. Where could she have possibly drawn this from? Impressive indeed. Defoe, Youssef, and Ruffalo combine to give a rock solid support, you couldn't ask for any better. Lastly the script is taught, complex, angular, yet comprehensive. So what's the problem? Why not 10-out-of-10? The film is too self-aware for me, it "pleasures" itself to the point of exhaustion. Just because you CAN do something doesn't always mean you SHOULD. It's needlessly excessive and as exhilarating as it is I found myself being impatient for it to end, because that exhilaration was too much for me to take for 140 minutes, the pacing became self-indulgent, so I grew to resent it more than admire it.
The First Nudie Musical (1976)
Hey, it later worked for Julie Andrews....
Taking an intentional (or accidental) cue from Mel Brooks classic "The Producers", then toss in the erstwhile Broadway embarrassment "Oh Calcutta" (also a nudie) and possibly the inspiration in some very small way for Blake Edwards S. O. B where we get to see Mary Poppins (Julie Andrews) bare her chest, we get a slight deviation/ variation of a musical with a porn twist. However in this instance we get something staged as a Broadway theatrical production but presented as a film. For a mainstream release, there certainly is a LOT of nudity, both male and female full-frontal, but hey, its the 70's so we shouldn't expect anything less. After Hollywood received thousands of complaints from automobile drivers who had kid passengers witness violence, horror and nudity on the big drive-in screens, as they were passing by on the freeway, a rating-system was introduced that controlled the showing of films to different age-groups. However in this case, this film was released at the same time Laverne & Shirley hit ABC during primetime, riding on the success of the mega hit Happy Days. Cindy Williams plays a very conservative character that had been introduced on Happy Days and very similar in the classic "American Graffiti",both starring with Ron Howard. The Hollywood brass and/or the combined strength of Penny Marshall and her brother Gary, who created Laverne & Shirley as a show, did not see the wisdom of having their co-lead star (Williams) who starred in a movie that had her included in scenes with exposed female/and male genitalia, and trivialized pornography while simultaneously playing a character Shirley, who is somewhat chaste and is "holding-out" for marriage, would send the right message to family members. Ergo, The 1st Nudie Musical was quickly swept under the rug in favor for the ABC sitcom. Oddly enough the only 2-women I wanted to see nude (Williams and the cute Diana Canova) are the only 2 performers who remained fully clothed. Oh well....
The Layover (2017)
Hallmark+ F-Bomb=Layover
Let's face it, the only reason Upton gets gigs like this is due to her Sport's Illustrated success. It's a safe general assumption her success with S. I. was based on 2 jiggly reasons. No one has mentioned her acting ability as her asset. Casting needed an opposite yet equally known co-protagonist: enter Daddario, who has better acting chops than Upton, but still fills the bill (or in this case fills the bikini) for this role. While the film offers some eye-candy,(which is carefully restrained) it doesn't off much more. I'm surprised an actor of Macy's level would choose to direct such a pointless movie that demands so little from its cast. The storyline is cliche'd and played, and if weren't for the oft-used F-bomb, and occasional aggressive nature, it could have easily been a made-for Hallmark vehicle. Sorry fellas, no nudity: Upton offers no more than a jiggle under baggy clothes, Daddario has a brief bikini scene. That's it! It may read shallow to bring that up, but what else are we to think when the two leads are uber-hot full-figured females, who's goal is to have sex with a stud they never learn his name? The film is flat, it has no dynamic, the script is sophomoric, and every time the story goes into a direction that had potential for larger-than-life theatrics, it gets pulled-back to safety. I can imagine every scene like that playing out in a different, more adult, more suited for its R-rating, that would have people chatting about it at the office water-cooler the next day. For a "Sex-Comedy" it has very little of both. Poor Kate cannot act and she's gained weight, so I am left to ask, why are you here? You miss nothing by avoiding this film.
Four Kinds of Love (1968)
Niche vintage soft-core viewing
I ONLY gave this a high rating for what it is: Niche vintage soft-core viewing. With the Free-Love movement of the 60s also came a quickly growing of acceptance of bared breasts in the mainstream formats of film and magazines. While published nudity already existed prior to the 60's, it was mostly relegated to scientific studies or underground porn or "nudie cuties." So when it became offered to a more broader audience, it was considered cutting-edge and somewhat of a marvel. Some may not know that we, as a society, had to adjust and discover how nudity would be tolerated in society. For example: up through the 70's comparatively "harder" publications had very explicit covers, some being XXX, openly displayed in drug/grocery stores for ALL to see. Today, that kind of promotion is rarely seen even in dedicated newsstands. It's considered to be grossly misplaced if not outright offensive.
So, this film "Four Kinds of Love" was a coming-of-age film that pushed the envelope of both free-love and casual nudity on a larger stage.
This film really exists only to showcase bared breasts. There is no frontal nudity or implied sex, just a lot of topless women who casually hang out with dressed men, sometimes dancing, and thats as far as it goes. Yes, I know "full- fontal" was not "legal" until 1969 (this is a 1968 film) so I know of those limitations. Had this film been made 1-year later, who knows what the same producers would have put out? And on that note, this film closely resembles "Suburban Pagans" in just about every conceivable way: the premise is the same, the look is the same, and several of the "actors" are the same. Of the two, IMO "Pagans" is far better. There is FAR more nudity, and the addition of two spectacular specimens of the app-expanded mammalian-cage variety being Marsha Jordan and Cara Peters, which to the latter, the dance scene must be seen to be believed.
She'll Follow You Anywhere (1971)
A "Sex-Comedy" with no sex or comedy.
You'd assume with the erstwhile title "She'll Follow You Anywhere" billed as a "Sex-Comedy" based on nymphomania would contain sex, comedy, and maybe even some nudity. You'd assume wrong. Re-titled as "Passion Potion" I can only assume the publisher and/or distributor thought the updated moniker might attract more attention or confuse/trick the poor saps (like me) who suffered this celluloid disasters the first time-around, into wasting time again.
This waste of materials is in no-way a rated-R affair. No violence, no bad language, no nudity (OK, about 1-second of semi-nudity about an hour-in). It also has no conceivable comedy, its merely poorly-performed physical gags by our 2 leads who mumble and stumble thru the entire film which only leads to complete and utter annoyance.
They spend most of the time experimenting with the formula of a cologne touted to be and accidental aphrodisiac. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. All of the time its tedious, boring, and again, annoying. Seriously, skip this one. You're welcome.
The Return of Count Yorga (1971)
Oatmeal, more oatmeal, PLEASE!
I sometimes read reviews and have to ask if we saw the same film. The Return of Count Yorga (which Gory and Orgy can be formed by the letters in the Count's name). The film has a slight essence of Hammer stylings, but then again, not enough. The use of lighting is atrocious and in one long scene it goes back and forth between night and dusk! There are a couple of scenes where Argento later ripped for Susperia.
The character of Tommy, a young boy I assume is mentally handicapped/challenged (or whatever that condition is called these days) plays a significant role in the film but must have been one of the producers relative or someone owes someone a favor (or money) because that kid cannot act AT ALL, like Steven Seagal bad.
There are several notable character actors in this dud, namely Hartley and Craig T Nelson, but there isn't much room for them to stretch with such a stiff script. Not much is explained, of this I am grateful.
There's some decent underscoring music, but thats about it for me.
Yorga is a British-snobby sort of vampire and has a bevy of female draculettes who don baggy tatter clothing, matted hair, drying oatmeal on their faces (I guess to give the impression of necrotic skin) and some seriously awful oversized (think baby walrus) plastic fangs. One of the Igor-esque characters has oatmeal skin too, and come to think of, so does the out-of-place pit of quicksand (quick-meal!). The blood looks like Campbells tomato juice with corn starch to thicken. There's no "bad" language, not that much horror and no real explicit gore, and on that topic, no nudity or even provocative clothing: a rarity in low-budget 70's films of the vampire genre, ESPECIALLY one with an R-rating. Easily PG-13. Zzzz....
Chesty Anderson U.S. Navy (1976)
Misleading title
Ok, let's cut to the quick. With the graphic of the poster, the name of "Chesty" and with "actresses" Uschi Digart and Joyce Gibson (credited as Joyce Mandel) it certainly would not be much of a stretch to assume there'd be at least a couple of scenes of exposed female body parts. You'd be wrong. One reviewer penned "nudity is kept to a minimum" key word being MINIMUM. Joyce is rear-view nude for about 2 seconds, and about the same time for lovely 70's T&A actress, Rosanne Katon's boobs. That's IT! Particularly strange when you consider all R-rated movies of this genre in the 70' had rampant/gratuitous nudity. This must be the ONLY film Uschi is fully clothed. By today's standards this could easily be PG-13.
The film itself is one big cliche: a senator hires the mob to kill a witness to him having sex in drag, and the US Navy girls are hellbent on solving the case Charlie's Angels style.
However, most surprising of all is the cast: Scatman Crothers (The Shining) Fred Willard (Spinal Tap) and Timothy Carey (Paths of Glory) just to name a few. Carey is the runaway performer, he's hilarious! But in the end, this film overtly bills itself as a sexploitation film, and it's simply not in any regard. What it really is, a snooze fest and a waste of time.
Groove Cruise (2017)
Fools with money
I don't have any real issues with the couple this documentary centers around, they seem like a nice loving couple with healthy self-esteem and discipline, but I am compelled to ask them why?
Why go thru all of the trouble of saving money, prep, and exercise/dieting for this cruise?
At least what is presented to the viewer is a bunch of obnoxious Millennials and Generation-Y-ers who want to drink, do drugs, yell, and dance to loud EDM. Aren't those the same things offered in any dance-club in any given city? And at a fraction of the price? I'm not sure why this is called an "adult" cruise, they serve alcohol and provide dancing on regular cruises. The only difference is, there seems to be a lax policy on drug screening which will only invite/embolden drug dealers to take the cruise. There was an alleged rape that occurred during the filming. While some of the participants may dress in a more revealing fashion, there isn't any nudity allowed. There weren't any orgies or swinger-parties, so I am missing the part where this is an "adult" affair. It seem more to me this is a place where some pampered offspring goes to escape society for a week and are not overly concerned about the costs, as this cruise, considering what is offered and what is NOT, is very expensive.
Free the Nipple (2013)
I'm not sure I get the points. (no pun intended)
On its own merit, this isn't a badly made docudrama at all, it does all the necessary things from a technical and substantive view. My rating reflects more about the message( or lack thereof) than the actual film itself. It seems to me, that eventually more and more states will not arrest a woman for exposure in public without any activism, so the real goal is to expedite the timeline of acceptance. I happen to think when its right for society it will be right for society. If it were legal in public NOW, in the states it currently is NOT, I don't see that making any measurable difference. Enabling doesn't always proffer a willingness to engage in something someone was hesitant to do to begin with. Legalizing pot has not increased the number of its users, and those users would not police themselves for reasons of shyness, embarrassment, ridicule, added attention, or fear of being objectified, or sexually harassed or encroached upon, like a woman most-likely would in vacillating over her decision to bare her breasts in public. My point being, net-net, what would change? How many women get arrested for exposure each year? Do they serve time? Isn't it just a misdemeanor? Are the arrests made primarily over the rights of the child being violated? What about public breast feeding? It was unclear to me if this film was really about censorship or about equality, as it doesn't really address the double-standard in published and licensed media. At the time of this review, their website was down, and they have around 75,000 followers on facebook. The bottom line, at least for me, is that its really not much of a cause, even though I agree with it. If its so important to take your top off in public, then simply move to a state where its legal.
The Lion King (2019)
Why?
Well, we know why. MONEY. Other than that, this was a waste of resources. The hand-drawn version was vastly superior, it had more soul.
This version plods along and is poorly paced. The dialogue is sub-standard.
The script is simple and slowly delivered.
This is strictly a young-child's fare.
A lot of people praised the original music score. I was NOT one of them, Elton (sorry, SIR Elton) hasn't done anything of merit since Rock of the Westies. Famous names don't impress me, great scores do, and the underscore sounds phoned in.
The lead vocals in the circle of life are horrendous.
I didn't hear much sound design or foley, they just used the VI East Meets West Hollywood Choir and Strings libraries to cover things up.
Does it look good? Of course its does. It's Disney after all, and Favreau is in full stride theses days. The CGI and art direction are immaculate, top notch.
I know the story, but 10 minutes-in, I was bored.
The Mandalorian (2019)
Every bit as great as it needs to be.
Glad to see Favreau has come into his own, rode it out, and is now getting(hopefully) the control he deserves. This is without a doubt, the best adjunct to the Star Wars I have seen, even eclipsing Rogue One, this is my favorite installment since The Empire Strikes Back. Jon has assembled a great team around his vision and script, and seemingly, Disney has bestowed some autonomy upon him. The Mandalorian pulled me in from the very first scene and has not let go, a true pleasure to watch and absorb, that is in line with the ambience of Episodes 4 & 5, perfectly paced, shot, edited, with great voice over, talent and production values. Music score,IMO, is the only less-than-stellar aspect of the this series so far. Its bet feature is that it does not insult the audience with needless childish gags, or overworked convoluted explanations. This will appeal to kids and adults.
I particularly love the re-introduction and acknowledgment of some of the peripheral characters like that annoying pet of Jaba nestled in his tail, now getting roasted while its like-specie's is forced to watch in horror. Other "beings" from A New Hope like Jawas and service droids. This is one of those rare times I actually am eager to see the next episode. At just $6 a month, Disney has offered far more than HBO does at $15. Hmm, who knows, maybe my faith in Disney is restored?
The Boys (2019)
I liked it better when it was called Watchmen
I only checked this series out because my son kept insisting. I don't really like this show,despite its decent cast and above par production values. In 2009, Watchmen , another anti-super hero movie, debuted to mixed reviews. Watchmen was vastly superior to The Boys in every way: vastly more intellectual script, better casting, better directing and production. While it was a bitter pill to swallow to see the dark and cruel side of superheroes, in the end, no matter how perverse or twisted, they still had a positive purpose: to protect mankind, and "get" the bad guys. The Boys abandons those principles with the seemingly single-purpose of eliminating all hope from mankind when we are at the tipping-point of society, economic, and ecology. Superheroes were created in the face of world wars, and patriotism. They were created for those to fantasize and be inspired by those others than the controlling dogmatic principles of organized religion. So what this series is actually saying is there is no trusting or believing in anyone anymore, and IMO, thats far more apocalyptic than any other show or movie I can think of. I don't need the mediums of a movie or TV series to remind me how bleak things are, thats not entertainment, thats news shows. In this "show" everyone lies to each other. Money/greed is the driving force behind the creation of the superheroes. Superheroes casually kill at will, some times with the intent to enact needless pain and suffering, to only callously laugh at their deaths later. But the time we get to the final episode of season-1, the big reveal didn't seem so big to me, it certainly wasn't anything I cared about, because I care nothing about the characters, and the climax was that of a daytime soap opera. Watchmen will be airing this fall as new miniseries on HBO, so now we will have TWO anti-hero shows. It seems a bit contradictory that Hollywood would endorse such a series when Marvel is a major chunk of their revenue for the past decade, its main $ coming from the kiddies. But make no mistake, The Boys is a purely an adult fare. This show is overtly and needlessly mean-spirited and cruel, and its message is so relentless it quickly becomes mind-numbingly boring. Maybe that was their goal all along.
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017)
The networks wish they were his hip.
I just started watching this, most likely because I got fed-up with Direct TV after AT&T bought them out, and their service went to crap; all for $240 a month. Thing is, I have had Amazon Prime for years but I had purchased that service only for the buying and selling of goods, and I didn't consider internet streaming as a viable "thing."
Clearly, I was wrong.
So reluctantly I selected this show, with no bias whatsoever.
I was instantly hooked. I fell in love with Brosnahan immediately, along with amazing writers and direction, she has created an amazing character, that is complex, multifaceted, ferocious and beautiful; kind of like Lucille Ball on steroids. An instant icon.
The production values are all well represented here, far beyond anything the majors are attempting. Sublime cinematography, very detailed set and wardrobe, marvelous music selections.
The cast is very strong, although Im not sold on Lenny Bruce, yet.
Some of the reviews state that women didn't talk like this and the scenarios were not plausible. Its a TV show, set in NYC: anything can happen, if you live there you know.
Why would I want to watch a story about completely normal life?
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel is about as close to a perfect dramedy series I have seen in the past decade; truly great writing, fast-pace, well edited, freshly stated. and above all entertaining. Don't try to overly intellectualize/analyze this show. just enjoy the abundance of well-developed characters within a great context and narrative, that is given along with the marvelous, Mrs. Maisel.
Happy Christmas (2014)
Why good screenwriters make big bucks.
Watching a totally improvised movie is like listening to bad jazz: a lot of predisposed assuredness that self-importance and self- indulgence are the key ingredients in entertainment. I give it 5-stars because the acting talent is well above par. However, the theater goer is not a lab-rat to be experimented on, unless you want to pay them for attending, yet that is what this film appears to be to me, a test-marketing venture to satisfy a selfish, if not arrogant, agenda. This is one of the rare appearances by Dunham where she didn't disrobe; negative/positive, you decide.
The Lady in Red (1979)
Dynasty Auditon.
Cute, frail Pamela Sue Martin gained family-friendly fame in the 70's with the hit TV show: The Nancy drew Mysteries. When they merged her show with the Hardy Boys she felt her role was too diminished so she left the series early to leave mega-TV-producer, Glen Larson, a casting hole to fill to complete the series. Never a good idea to bite the hand that feeds you, but you know how Hollywood egos can get. So in 1979 she landed a role as the lead in this little piece of smut-o-rama: The Lady In Red, one can only assume to shake-off the little-bo-peep persona from Nancy Drew, in similar fashion to how Britney, Miley, Christina , et al, did to get more adult roles or pursue more edgier entertainment styles. This film puts Pam thru the ringers: she grows up a poor farm girl, but even then we catch a glimpse of her sociopathic tendencies as she hurls freshly laid eggs onto the mother hens that just laid them (eek!), casually abets Bonnie & Clyde in an armed robbery then gets tossed from a moving car' no big deal. Then painfully loses her virginity; yet no big deal. Of course she learns quickly, if not from her abusive father, that nearly all men are horny misogynists violent pigs, but hey this Hollywood, so its acceptable, just as it is to drop the "N" word often. She then goes on the be an abused sweat-shop worker, a violent inmate, a high priced call girl, and a gangster's GF (Dillinger) near the end of the film. In between are multiple scenes of violence, torture humiliation, murder, rape, sex, and nudity; some full-frontal (with the help of real-life porn stars, notably Kitten Nativitad), nearly unnecessary and totally self-aware. To say the film jumps around a lot would be an insult to kangaroos. It's poorly directed, staged, and edited. Casting snagged several good actors but the script borders on being childish. I had no idea what the real point of the film was, nor how I was to feel about our protagonist. The overall look, from start-to-finish, is that of a low-budget TV series, for it had no theatrical appearance at all. Had it not contained the overt "adult elements", it nearly could have been a TV mini series, with time to explore and explain characters ( and history) more clearly. Oh, well, it got Pam her role as Fallon on Dynasty for the next 4-years. After that, she fell off the map.
Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (1979)
1st season: OK, 2nd season: yikes!
Ok, lets keep things in perspective. TV in the 70's and early 80's wasn't very respected or serious, and as such, budgets were limited ( especially when seasons commonly had more than 20 episodes as opposed to the 6-12 episodes modern series have now). Sci-Fi shows have it rough to begin with: they are expensive to produce with futuristic and alien set-designs, costuming , sounds FX, orchestral music ( no synths, MIDI,or DAWS back then) and spacecraft action in outer-space.
Riding on the heels of the popularity of Star Wars, Alien, Logan's Run, Star-Trek ( which had just had its 1st major-motion film release) and Battlestar Galactica, Glen Larson revisited a popular figure from his generation with the fantasy character Buck Rogers.
The first season introduces us to the premise and the characters pretty well, and for the most part it works. The writing is decent enough, the acting fine, and just like Star Trek, there is often great peril and plenty of sexy babes. The main difference is that the danger usually stems from earth, as opposed Trek where the danger is in space itself. Some of the set designs look like they were taken from Galactica, and the way the ships move about and the sound FX are nearly identical.
Erin Gray, easily in the all-time top-5 space hotties, has serious responsibilities and they rarely used her gender in any romantic fare. But thats OK, no one has ever filled-out a pair of spandex slacks better, EVER. I give her kudos and high-marks as she played her character with as much dignity and class as one could. But by the time the 1st-season was winding down, the show became silly and characters got replaced by lesser ones, and even sillier ones introduced.
Second season now has a character with a feather-cap called Hawk. You see, Hawk is part .....hawk, so therefore should be called......hawk. LOL! I guess Larson was handed down a mandate from the network brass that went something like this: "make this more appealing to kids, add a needless 2nd-protagonist, and cut the weekly production budget by 1/3.
The show certainly seems, by all appearances, to have subscribed to that mandate.
Twiki's voice got replaced, Wilma's role was reduced and her outfits looked like something quakers designed. They got rid of Dr. Huer and Dr. Theopolis and replaced them with Jay Garner who has one emotion: angry. Wilfred Hyde White, a British actor who is completely out of place, and wears sweaters the entire time, and a truly lame robot with an overtly gay voice that acts like a know-it-all and is pissy anyone asks it a question. It was a rapid descent downhill after this, and I never saw Gerard or Gray again. Pity. I really liked them.
Let's hope Buck Rogers gets a reboot sometime soon.